And Robert Byrd adds: "His name sounds fishy."

I'm just upset that Dr. Quinn Medicine Woman was overlooked.

Gupta's criticism of Sicko was deserved, but he's still a hack journalist, and no better than Moore in many respects for seeking sensationalist stories. Gupta is symptomatic of the poor journalistic standards at CNN. This is the kind of "bright" mind Obama wants to have at his side? Please.

Democrats should oppose this nomination because Gupta doesn't seem to agree with the party line on healthcare reform. Republicans should oppose this nomination because Gupta is just more of the same pseudo-intellectual drivel that has been shoved down our throats by the new democratic elite. Anyone else with half a brain should oppose this nomination because Gupta is just a hack journalist. We're going to be chasing after all sorts of phantom ailments and searching for cures from voodoo witch doctors. No thanks.

So, have we learned anything yet? A Harvard Law degree does not mean you're some sort of supergenius. Some goddamned lawyers need to get over themselves, and I say this in the most loving way possible as a lawyer myself.

God, who cares? I'm serious.

This Gupta thing is what Obama likes to call a "distraction." Normally Obama's distractions are things that he doesn't want you to talk about because it might cause you to question the man's judgment. Don't pay attention to Rev. Wright; he's a distraction! Blagojavich? Never heard of him! Distraction!

This is a little different, though. Obama has been rolling out the bad news slowly: you might not get that tax cut, you can pretty much forget about getting Social Security, you're not going to get your Skittles-pooping unicorn. Amidst all the bad news, Obama needed a distraction, so he rolled out Gupta for the Surgeon General post.

Fine with me. Gupta seems likable enough, and his job is basically impossible to fuck up. But really, there are much bigger fish to fry here. If Rev. Wright was a distraction, then Gupta is, like, a distraction after hitting the gym for an 80's movie workout montage.

John Conyers should know if Dr. Gupta is unqualified, being himself the physical embodiment of the term.

Gupta is a neurosurgeon (&med-school professor) who also devotes substantial time to explaining health issues to the general public. That doesn't sound out of line for a Surgeon General.

C. Everett Koop was a pediatric surgeon before he was picked as SG. It's my understanding that he did not have significant experience in public health before he was tapped for the job (I believe he had served about a year as Dep. Asst. Sec. for Health). The main reason that he was picked was that he had taken a strong pro-life stance.

I don't know if Koop was a good or bad SG. But, other than Elders--who I remember because she was fired for promoting masturbation--I can't name one single SG. I'm not sure if we even have one now (I think I read it's only an acting SG). One can argue that the SG post is needed or not. But, assuming we have one, I think Gupta is a pretty good choice.

Also, I think he deserves recognition for his work as an embedded journalist with the "Devil Docs." (The Navy doctors who are assigned to work with the USMC). He was with their modern version of a MASH unit during the beginning of the Iraq war. It was close to the front lines. Normally, those units don't have neurosurgeons. On 5 occasions, Gupta stepped out of his journalist role and performed brain surgery. I believe that he saved at least one Marine who had been shot in the head. The article I read described him removing the bullet from his brain.

Conyers complains that Gupta is not a bureaucrat who worked his way up through the uniformed public health service. I imagine there are a number of those people who can be tapped as Gupta's chief deputy. But, assuming we want an SG who can connect with the American people like Koop did, I think Gupta is a great choice.

I understand many of the people on this site think that an SG in that mold is just the chief scold for the nanny state. That's a legitimate viewpoint, but it's not really Gupta specific.

Being a TV doctor does seem to create a presumption that you're a vacuous idiot, but it should be a rebuttable presumption. Also, a large part of the surgeon general's job is PR, so I don't see how Gupta's experience explaining complicated medical stuff on TV is a disqualification.

These hearings will be interesting. Gupta could turn out to be a flop, but he could also turn out to be an inspired choice.

ll
Does he agree with former Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders that: "We're probably all going to die of something."?

Which is statistically idiotic. Have any of us VCers ever died? Of anything?

Anyone?

I rest my case.

The whole office is a waste of any taxes I pay. Unnecessary clap trap.

"The whole office is a waste of any taxes I pay. Unnecessary clap trap."

Yeah I don't get it either, Micky Mouse could be the surgeon general and not a darn thing would change in anyone's life.

Now a candidate for office is being criticized for having criticized Michael Moore???? Is this a joke?

I agree that Moore's a dope, but I have always wondered why we think that physicians have any special qualifications to opine on the economics of national health insurance programs.

Physicians know how to treat disease. They probably all have worthwhile opinions on the effectiveness and problems with medical education. Those in private practice know a bit about running a business. Those who move into administrative positions in hospitals will have greater business management insights. But none of these experiences or classroom or clinical education qualify doctors to discuss national health insurance policy at anything more than a trivial, anecdotal microeconomic level.

BTW, without looking it up, who is the current Surgeon General? The one before that? Any since Elders?

And no one would remember Elders if she hadn't advocated teaching fish how to swim teenagers how to beat off.

No one can name any Surgeons General who isn't named Koop or Elders.

That's More's next film, "Beating Off With Sanjay Guppy".

Is Dr. Crusher available (in ca. 1992 form)? I think the public, at least the male half, would pay rather more attention to their health.

By my count, in the last twenty years we've had 12 years of Surgeons General and 8 years of Acting Surgeons General. Even after going over the list I still only recognized three names (Elders, Koop, and Ehrlich.)

So I don't care. But it's funny to me that "He's The One" Democrats have such a problem with it. If the next four years are as entertaining as the last two months, I may be forced to regret my vote in the 2008 election.

Sarah wrote:

But it's funny to me that "He's The One" Democrats have such a problem with it.

A substantial number of Obama's supporters have been indignant every waking moment for the past eight years. If they're not raging against the machine (or at least against a cog in it), they'll have nothing to do. They've got to pick a fight, even with The One. It's all they know.

I do wonder, though, how the perpetually indignant left is going to do when they don't have Bush to blame for every problem. Bush being out of office is going to leave a gaping hole in their lives. My guess is that they'll still manage to blame Bush for everything. In three years Obama's going to be explaining why he deserves to keep his job, and his supporters will tell us that every problem/failure was inherited from Bush.

As a Republican in New York, I have to say I like the Gupta move. Not because I believe he has some sort of super-intellectual ability that qualifies him over any other physician in the country. But, because his job at CNN was to explain complicated issues to the American people and if he wants to be the next Koop or Elders, that skill will be extremely useful. Of course, instead we could get someone like the Commissioner of Health of the State of New York who put out this fine video defending Governor Paterson's tax on non-diet soda Personally I'd rather Gupta, at least he'd look like he had a clue...

This would be the same John Conyers who spoke frequently at LaRouche organization gatherings (including their PAC) and who invited LaRouche-affiliated people to be half the witnesses at a public hearing he put on years ago on a DC public hospital? I can't think of a member of Congress whose opposition is more likely to make me support a nominee.

Nick